171
to green industrial policy assumes that once a strategy is launched (e.g. priority sectors identified, incentives defined and plans published) the trajectory will unfold predictably and without further intervention. While bowling presumes stable lanes and known dynamics, curling assumes uncertainty and demands constant intervention. For green industrial policy, where technologies, markets and political coalitions evolve rapidly, the latter assumption is far more realistic. This is where development finance institutions can play an important role. Over the past 50 years, organizations like the OPEC Fund have supported infrastructure, energy systems and productive sectors across the developing world. In doing so, they have helped countries expand the basic capabilities required for economic transformation. Looking ahead, the challenge is not only to finance green investments but to support the institutional learning that makes those investments effective. Financing a solar plant or a wind farm is important. But equally important is helping governments build the analytical and policy capacity to identify which green industries can realistically emerge and how policies can adapt as technologies evolve. Development finance, in other words, should increasingly focus on strengthening the agility of the cooks, not merely supplying the ingredients. If the past half-century taught us anything, it is that development is a dynamic and ever-changing process. And the next 50 years of development will likely belong to countries that master adaptive policymaking, with governments capable of experimenting, learning and adjusting course as the green transition unfolds. For ambitious developing nations, it is time to finally learn how to cook in the face of adversity and uncertainty.
“Having a vision is good, but vision without realistic implementation is a hallucination.”
Powered by FlippingBook